Inner functions and outer 'this' (Re: That hash symbol)

Sam Tobin-Hochstadt samth at
Tue Mar 29 05:52:20 PDT 2011

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
<allen at> wrote:
> (I think I'm the only one to use the syntax  ^this in a proposal so I'm not sure where 1,3,4 (at least using ^this syntax) came from.

Well, I wasn't sure if you meant 1 or 2, and other people had
suggested 3 and 4 (but I think using # instead of ^).

>> Personally, I think that a way to name the implicit binding of the
>> receiver would be better than adding more hardcoded names to the
>> standard.  The |^this| proposals seem problematically implicit,
>> especially since we had quite reasonable suggestions (at the meeting
>> at least) for naming |this| explicitly instead.
> The reason I really like ^this is it co-exists very nicely with the existing fixed implicit this binding.  It address the primary scoping issue that arises from that implicit binding.  Unlike the explicit this naming forms that have been discussed it would work in all function definition forms without adding any new header syntax to any of the function definition forms.

I agree entirely that it goes with the existing fixed implicit |this|
binding -- I just think that cuts the other way.  The reason we're
having this discussion is that the existing behavior of |this| isn't
always what you want, and is hard to get around because of its fixed
and implicit nature.  I think we should alleviate *that* problem, not
just the worst symptom.
sam th
samth at

More information about the es-discuss mailing list